Hulu for iPad Likely to Be a Paid Subscription Service

[MorphingDragon]

Precisely..

I could never understand the "plugin" crap when Apple is always pushing me crap I don't wan't on my Windows box. (iPhone Tool, Safari, Bonjour, 100 MB update every time a new icon is added to iTunes, etc...) and the fact that iTunes and Safari are themselves "resource hogs" on Windows.

I love Apple as much as the next guy here but I'll be damned if I can't criticize what I consider to be some of the company's worst decisions since 1999.

FWIW - The Flash plugin install is 1.83 Mb.



Err, iTunes 9, as far as I know is still Carbon.

Meanwhile:

"Following Apple’s lead of dropping the ageing PowerPC architecture for Snow Leopard, Adobe have outlined its plans for a PPC-free future in a recent blog entry. The next iteration of its Creative Suite, popular among designers and the like, will not only be going Intel-only, but will also be rewritten in Cocoa for 64-bit native support"

And people are accusing Adobe of being lazy...

Once again, it seems to me that it is Apple who doesn't want to collaborate with Adobe to get Flash running how it should on the iPad, not the other way around. In fact, Apple has been making sure that such collaboration will be impossible if we consider the way that they have been insulting Adobe in the last few years/months.

The only reason Adobe is re-writing CS is because Apple took away 64-Bit support for Carbon.

 

[michelle21]

Isn't Apps like that against Hulus policy? I am not sure, I thought I saw someone post that it is.

I know I used Playon back in it's beta testing and tried Hulu out with it. Watched a few TV episodes when I didn't have cable.

The app plays content from any media server on your local network, if one of them just happens to have hulu content then it can play it.

Everyone is aware of the limitations of the iphone mediaplayer.

there are a lot of servers that work with the ps3 and xbox and more are being developed because its supports a simple format of mpeg 2 ac3 or mpeg layer 2.

What we did was design our iphone player around those specs.

http://web.me.com/cannonwc/Site/Photos_8.html

 

[AidenShaw]

The only reason Adobe is re-writing needs to rewrite CS is because Apple took away 64-Bit support for Carbon.

And the only reason that Adobe is spending millions in development
costs rewriting CS, with no real benefit to the end-user, is
because Apple broke its commitment for compatible 64-bit systems.

Doesn't bother me, though, because I have 64-bit CS on another
operating system that runs on x64 chips.

 

[MorphingDragon]

And the only reason that Adobe is spending millions in development
costs rewriting CS, with no real benefit to the end-user, is
because Apple broke its commitment for compatible 64-bit systems.

Doesn't bother me, though, because I have 64-bit CS on another
operating system that runs on x64 chips.

Actually, Cocoa would speed up CS as Carbon was never optimized for Mac OSX. Carbon was designed as a gap between OS9 and OSX and kept a lot of legacy features. Really, Apple removing Carbon is keeping a statement made when OSX was released. OSX was released at least a decade ago.

Its a bit like if a Windows 7 app on windows was written in Win32. Oh wait, thats exactly what happened, and now several Family Law firms have to pay for it. IMO, if a programmer isn't able to keep up with current spec. They don't deserve to program. Otherwise you end up with iTunes. As to why CS wasn't written in Cocoa to begin with well...

The most curious thing is, in the OpenSource world. If a projects dumps legacy code, APIs etc. Everyone greets the bright new future with praise. But if it happens in the proprietary world, its frowned upon. Now I realize the importance of program stability, but a decade is too long in one of the fastest developing industries.